“The 'value' of particular artists after Duchamp can be weighed according to how much they questioned the nature of art.” — Joseph Kosuth Copy Share Image
All art (after Duchamp) is conceptual (in nature) because art only exists conceptually. — Joseph Kosuth Copy Share Image
Anything can be art. Art is the relations between relations, not the relations between objects. — Joseph Kosuth Copy Share Image
That celebrated marriage of science and art, photography, seemed at the time to join together how we look at the world, art, with how… — Joseph Kosuth Copy Share Image
Forget your ideas about art. Make a shopping list of everything you like about what you've done. Include qualities that you've seen in your… — Joseph Kosuth Copy Share Image
I liked that the work itself was something other than simply what you saw It meant you could have an art work which was… — Joseph Kosuth Copy Share Image
Making something new to look at is a futile and empty act if its only audience is the eyes. — Joseph Kosuth Copy Share Image
Unlike the marks of a painting, the photo seems to organize its 'opinions' in relation to the world; even when the photographs have clearly… — Joseph Kosuth Copy Share Image
When objects are presented within the context of art (and until recently objects always have been used) they are as eligible for aesthetic consideration… — Joseph Kosuth Copy Share Image
Photography, as an invention, was both art and science. The view it gave us of the world was in some measure acceptable because it… — Joseph Kosuth Copy Share Image
“The 'value' of particular artists after Duchamp can be weighed according to how much they questioned the nature of art.” — Joseph Kosuth Copy Share Image
All art (after Duchamp) is conceptual (in nature) because art only exists conceptually. — Joseph Kosuth Copy Share Image
